Quotes of the day

posted at 10:41 pm on May 24, 2012 by Allahpundit

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Thursday denounced as “unjust and unwarranted” the treatment of a Pakistani doctor who was jailed for 33 years for helping in the hunt for Osama bin Laden…

The chief US diplomat said Afridi’s role “was instrumental in taking down one of the world’s most wanted murderers. That was clearly in Pakistan’s interest, as well as ours and the rest of the world’s.”…

Her remarks were stronger than those given Wednesday by State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland who said Pakistan had “no basis for Dr. Afridi to be held.”

***

Two Senate committees today took the first legislative steps to cut aid to Pakistan after that country’s conviction of Dr. Shakil Afridi, who aided American intelligence in its mission to kill Osama bin Laden…

The committee approved the amendment, offered by Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., by a unanimous 30-0 vote. The funds would continue to be withheld until Afridi gets released from prison and cleared of all charges relating to his assistance in locating bin Laden.

***

“He was not and is not a spy for our country. This was not a crime against Pakistan. It was an effort and locate and help bring to justice the world’s No. 1 terrorist,” [Feinstein] said. “This conviction says to be that al Qaeda is viewed by the court to be Pakistan … I don’t know which side of the war Pakistan is on.”…

“Pakistan is a schizophrenic at best ally,” Graham said as he introduced the amendment to cut funding over the Afridi situation. “They are helping the Haqqani network … which is basically a mob trying to take over parts of Afghanistan. And the ISI constantly provides assistance in Quetta on the Pakistani side of the border.”

“The situation with the doctor is a classic example of not understanding the world the way it is,” Graham said. “We need Pakistan, but we don’t need a Pakistan that cannot see the justice in bringing bin Laden to an end.”

***

Former U.S. intelligence officers accused the Obama administration of dropping the ball on the case of the Pakistani doctor sentenced to 33 years in prison for helping find Usama bin Laden — with one openly challenging the State Department’s claim that it pressed his case “regularly” with Islamabad…

Peter Brookes, a former analyst and adviser with several intelligence agencies who is now a senior fellow with the Heritage Foundation, told Fox News on Thursday that the U.S. should have had a plan to get him out of Pakistan immediately following the raid…

“From what I’m hearing, we did pretty much nothing,” [former military intelligence officer Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer] said. “We did nothing diplomatically at all, didn’t raise a finger. … From what my sources tell me, we did nothing to try and help this guy.”

He and Brookes expressed concern that Afridi’s plight could make it more difficult to convince foreign sources to work with U.S. intelligence on counterterror missions in the future.

***

Pakistan’s clear message to the U.S.: don’t violate our sovereignty. Its message to its own citizens: don’t even think about cooperating with the CIA. To ensure that Afridi would be found guilty and sentenced harshly, Islamabad arranged to have him tried in a government court presided over by a tribal political agent in consultation with a council of elders under the 19th-century Frontier Crimes Regulations that were drawn up by the British colonial power at the time. Under the FCR, the court is not subject to the Pakistani constitution, and its sentences are usually harsher than those handed down by the mainstream Pakistani court system. Nor can the sentences of tribal courts be appealed in normal Pakistani courts. Once sentenced, Afridi was transferred immediately out of the Khyber tribal agency and thrown into the Central Prison in Peshawar.

The government insists it will ensure his safety. But many Pakistanis are not so sure. In the court of public opinion, he is seen as a traitor. Not surprisingly, the Pakistani Taliban praised the sentence. “In my heart I wanted to kiss feet of the political agent for punishing Shakil with a lifelong prison term,” Janfida Wazir, a Pakistani Taliban commander from the South Waziristan tribal agency, tells The Daily Beast. “Our mujahideen, Sheik Osama’s family, and I are very happy with the great judgment of the political agent.”

Wazir also says militants are determined to kidnap or kill Afridi if they get the chance. “Shakil is a dead man already,” he says. “The government can’t build a separate jail for him.” Afghans and Pakistanis who are cooperating with the U.S. eventually will meet Afridi’s fate and be abandoned by the U.S., adds Wazir. “What happened to Afridi is a good lesson for those puppets of the U.S. in Afghanistan and Pakistan,” he says. “They will be thrown away like rubbish after the U.S. has achieved its goals.”

The head of a banned charity widely believed to be a front for the international terrorist group Lashkar-e-Taiba is wanted by both India and the United States for his alleged role in orchestrated the 2008 Mumbai attacks. The Lahore High Court dropped all charges against Saeed in 2009. Last month, the U.S. offered a $10 million reward for information leading to Saeed’s arrest, which raised some eyebrows since he’s not in hiding. Saeed held a press conference inviting U.S. authorities to come and get him.

Abdul Qadeer Khan

Despite having admitted to selling nuclear secrets to North Korea, Iran, and Libya, A.Q. Khan was freed from house arrest in 2009. The father of Pakistan’s nuclear program has been officially pardoned and is now immune from further prosecution.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Forgive me if this is a bit boring. When I was younger and had to have the type of stereo in my car that would power me to the next gas station, if I ran out of gas. I was sitting at a stop light listening to the four seasons. there was a nice older couple to my left while we were sitting at the stop light. This kid pulls up in a lowered car with the boom boom stereo playing (c)rap, the “c” is silent you know, music. So I turn up my stereo to drown out the kids (c)rap music. The elder couple just look over at me… and give the biggest smile, while the kid next to me just has this completely puzzled look on his face.

I must say I am heartbroken, nay!, crest-fallen to discover this truth, when here I believed you were riding the tide of zeitgeist and, oh, that non c’est pas, that you had more than a certain panache.

Clip was selected for brevity (and Bernstein), but you’re probably right about the balance between voices and music. Recorded in a cathedral, after all. Anyway, you should listen to the entire symphony for about 50 times the impact of the ending. Here’s the libretto off the internet to read what they’re singing.

I know I didn’t give much info. Just didn’t want to type a ginormous paragraph. Another problem with this touchy cursor is that I will be in the middle of a sentence, then all of a sudden I’m typing in the preceding paragraph. Because that’s where the cursor was hovering.

Does that help any? If not, don’t worry about it and thanks to you guys for attempting to help. Much appreciated.

You’ve done the ordinary stuff, like shut it down, reboot, etc., right? Had a jumpy cursor that wanted to edit things I’d long since left behind in Word. Was a software thing that rebooting seemed to fix.

I’ve turned into more of a federalist in the sense that I believe states should be allowed to legalize just about anything over the age of 18. But it cuts both ways in the sense that if a state wants to illegalize certain things, such as abortion, they should have that right as well.

I’ve turned into more of a federalist in the sense that I believe states should be allowed to legalize just about anything over the age of 18. But it cuts both ways in the sense that if a state wants to illegalize certain things, such as abortion, they should have that right as well.

John the Libertarian on May 25, 2012 at 3:18 AM

Um, yeah. I’m a federalist, too.
Anything that the Constitution does not say that the federal government may do, I feel is for the states (or the people) to decide.

(I feel you, but let’s make sure we know what we’re talking about when we talk of federalism. We haven’t had it in…forever.)

Sounds like a touchpad problem. I don’t mean to be glib, but you should get a Mac. I resisted for years, and finally surrendered and have never looked back.

John the Libertarian on May 25, 2012 at 3:16 AM

I’ve always been a Mac person. Love them. It’s just a budgetary thing at the moment. Within a matter of weeks, I lost my PC, my DVD player, my phone, my toaster oven, and also had dental work and a car in the shop.

I know I didn’t give much info. Just didn’t want to type a ginormous paragraph. Another problem with this touchy cursor is that I will be in the middle of a sentence, then all of a sudden I’m typing in the preceding paragraph. Because that’s where the cursor was hovering.

Does that help any? If not, don’t worry about it and thanks to you guys for attempting to help. Much appreciated.

You’ve done the ordinary stuff, like shut it down, reboot, etc., right? Had a jumpy cursor that wanted to edit things I’d long since left behind in Word. Was a software thing that rebooting seemed to fix.

Well, I think we shall deem you custom… as you don’t strike me as the fashion type, you don’t always stand on etiquette, and you are customarily a very good source of relevance :)

uncommon sense on May 25, 2012 at 3:18 AM

Thanks! That works better than, “see, back in high school…” Yours lends a certain irony in that we tended to employ the phrase precisely to mock local custom, tempora et mores. I’m better behaved now, and leave the mockery at work.

Of course, “uncommon sense” works on several levels of irony, as well. Great name.

(I feel you, but let’s make sure we know what we’re talking about when we talk of federalism. We haven’t had it in…forever.)

RedCrow on May 25, 2012 at 3:25 AM

Not since the War Between The States.

John the Libertarian on May 25, 2012 at 3:26 AM

Very much a Tenther (Amendment) here. Wars, especially Civil Wars, have a way of creating exigencies that become permanent distortions of the original idea. The Late Unpleasantness gave us unprecedented consolidation of federal power, the income tax, greenbacks, systematic detention without trial… could go on.

Still, wonder how we’d have managed WWI and WWII without national federal conscription, as opposed to the separate states raising volunteer armies, then mustering them into federal service as was done in the Civil War.

Still, wonder how we’d have managed WWI and WWII without national federal conscription, as opposed to the separate states raising volunteer armies, then mustering them into federal service as was done in the Civil War.

de rigueur on May 25, 2012 at 3:46 AM

Lol. Yeah, me too.
Fact is, we really need all us old guys to report for duty immediately. It won’t happen, but that’s what’s needed.

“They” need to know that our country runs by its founding document–the Constitution. “They” don’t think it’s all that importamt, at the moment. (“Are you kidding?”) But, “they” don’t really have anything to worry about.

The Late Unpleasantness gave us unprecedented consolidation of federal power

de rigueur on May 25, 2012 at 3:46 AM

Gee, if I were any more cynical, I’d posit that the North was using slavery as a wedge issue to centralize power. Just to be clear, slavery does not float my libertarian boat. But you are absolutely correct, the excesses of that Reconstruction were an abomination and far exceeded the scope of that war.

Imagine if Lincoln had proposed 20-year limits on slavery, and requisite education and training. It might have taken a generation or two to abolish the practice, but we might have averted the slaughter of hundreds of thousands. In other words, we could have phased it out.

Imagine if Lincoln had proposed 20-year limits on slavery, and requisite education and training. It might have taken a generation or two to abolish the practice, but we might have averted the slaughter of hundreds of thousands. In other words, we could have phased it out.

John the Libertarian on May 25, 2012 at 3:58 AM

Even the Founders, when they were wrestling with the problem, knew we’d pay for this…

I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that his justice cannot sleep forever. Thomas Jefferson

But that’s a topic– one I’m particularly interested in– to revisit another night.

The mouse is bad. The clicker is on the fritz. They make ‘em so cheap now. Don’t waste any more time until you go to Big Lots and buy one for $5. Best to eliminate one variable at a time, from cheapest to pricey.

Imagine if Lincoln had proposed 20-year limits on slavery, and requisite education and training. It might have taken a generation or two to abolish the practice, but we might have averted the slaughter of hundreds of thousands. In other words, we could have phased it out.

John the Libertarian on May 25, 2012 at 3:58 AM

It’s why I find Lincoln so brilliant and brave, and so many others find him to be stupid and a coward.

Look at Odumbo. The man needs weeks of polling to aver that he might be in favor, slightly, of something.

It’s why I find Lincoln so brilliant and brave, and so many others find him to be stupid and a coward.

RedCrow on May 25, 2012 at 4:04 AM

Brave, yes. Brilliant? Things got very rash. I think we could have phased out the practice without losing so many lives. Look at the regulations we have to deal with these days. They’ve perfected the art of slow-boiling the frog.

Cane, I was hoping to see you. I wanted to ask if there was any success in finding the missing girl. Did you go out in your boat?

4Grace on May 25, 2012 at 4:08 AM

Hey, yes, 10 hours, about 40 miles on the water with a tiller handle, searching each coulee and ditch and cut along the way. No sign of her. Black fishermen fishing for catfish in the boonies and I saw young girls coming up to them on the riverbank and handing out flyers. Squads of young folks – 10 to 15 bikes at a time, pedlaing all over town. People crawling up in drainage pipes. Our town is heartbroken.

Not sure what other choice he had. The south (even those who knew slavery was wrong) wasn’t going to give them up for cotton.

His brilliance was in the fact that his first priority was to preserve the Union. (He was against slavery, but knew that he had to keep the states together.) When his hand was forced (SC? I’m a bit smashed), he went on with the coming war.

We’ve got 12-year-old girls out in bike gangs looking for Mickey. It brought tears to my eyes seeing them today. We’ve got such a tight, loving community… a big ol’ 150,000-person small town. We look out for each other. Leave the keys in your car, etc. Everyone is looking for Mickey.

>It’s why I find Lincoln so brilliant and brave, and so many others find him to be stupid and a coward.

RedCrow on May 25, 2012 at 4:04 AM

Brave, yes. Brilliant? Things got very rash. I think we could have phased out the practice without losing so many lives. Look at the regulations we have to deal with these days. They’ve perfected the art of slow-boiling the frog.

John the Libertarian on May 25, 2012 at 4:10 AM

Slavery had been a festering wound for four score and seven years, since the Republic’s founding. The Founders thought it might die out. And it might have, but for the invention of the cotton gin. Unexpected.

Now here we are after roughly a century of determined Progressivism and an earlier half-century of unintended but equally damaging alterations of our constitutional system. Will we be able to get back even halfway closer to where we started by phasing out all that’s been changed? Or will things have to get rash?

Lincoln’s Secretary of State Seward described the impending war as “the irrepressible conflict.” I think the die was cast by the time Lincoln took office (it was his election that actually triggered the secessions of the southern states). Are we facing our own irrepressible conflict? As someone said upthread, it’s gotten really polarized out there…

His brilliance was in the fact that his first priority was to preserve the Union.

RedCrow on May 25, 2012 at 4:17 AM

I’m just suggesting that had he been more apt for negotiation, and had taken a generation or two to phase out slavery, more lives would have been saved, and if mandatory education and training of slaves had been accepted, blacks would have been better prepared for the eventual emancipation.

We’re right off I-10 and she could be in California or Mexico by now. There are billboards going up in Texas. Worse, there’s a carnival in town, so lots of different transient faces. The timing couldn’t be worse.

Maybe it’ll turn up, but I just wrote at length about that. I think the die was cast when Lincoln took office (his election had already caused the southern states to secede). His Secretary of State Seward had years before characterized the impending situation as “the irrepressible conflict.”

We’ve been under determined Progressivists for about 100 years, another 50 for the alterations in our constitutional system wrought by civil war. Longer than the Republic had been afflicted with slavery. Do you think we’ll be able to “phase out” these things to get back to the original system? Or will something more rash be required?